WADSWORTH RBT v. United States of America, Defendant. (2019)

The federal government has petitioned for reconsideration of our decision in Wadsworth v. Talmage, 365 Or. 558, 450 P.3d 486 (2019). The government objects to a sentence in which we described the parties’ positions on whether plaintiffs’ funds were traceable to an interest in real property:

“The parties agree that plaintiffs’ funds are traceable to at least the half-interest in RiverCliff that Talmage purchased from wife in 2005, after their divorce.”

Id. at 581, 450 P.3d 486. The government argues that that sentence implies that the government has conceded that plaintiffs will be able to satisfy their burden of proof with respect to facts relevant to whether their funds can be traced to that interest in the property. The government did not make any such factual concession, and we recognize that the sentence could be read to imply that it did. Accordingly, we replace the sentence quoted above with the following:

“Under the facts alleged in the complaint, plaintiffs’ funds are traceable to at least the half-interest in RiverCliff that Talmage purchased from his wife in 2005, after their divorce.”

The petition for reconsideration is allowed. The former opinion is modified and adhered to as modified.

BALMER, J.